1999 Steinway L with heavy action

[Mark Davidson]

That's basically what I did.  Started out without roller bearing,
but I realized after only five or six notes that I couldn't consistent
numbers, and was seeing up to .5 gram variation for the same
hammer. So rigged up a bearing and started over.

I think David Love is bugged by the fact the something just
doesn't add up, and I agree.

The only other odd thing I have noticed is that the capstan
screws seemed quite high.  So maybe the horizontal spread
is normal but not the vertical?  The increased distance from
top of capstan to bottom of balance rail hole would decrease
leverage, would it not?

-Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "David C. Stanwood" <stanwood@tiac.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 8:17 AM
Subject: RE: 1999 Steinway L with heavy action


> Dear Mark and all,
>
> I see no problem with your measuring SW with the hammer facing down, shank
> level, and flange tipped up - resting on a roller bearing.  Is this your
> technique?   It's what I first described in the Journal but have since
> changed to resting the tail on the scale... You must use a roller
> bearing... otherwise the results will vary quite a bit..
>
> There is a drawing for the SW setup at the URL that David Love gave:
>
> http://www.stanwoodpiano.com/SW-HWstandards3.pdf
>
> David Stanwood
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives